The University of Wisconsin-Madison: Modernizing a Campus by Committee
For the past several years, we at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have
managed a significant IT implementation called ISIS—the Integrated Student
Information System. In creating this project, we aimed to modernize all the
student operations on campus, from admissions, to enrollment, to student financial
processes. After an intense search process, we selected PeopleSoft’s Student
Administration application. Our original implementation took place in 1998,
and in August 2002, we completed a successful upgrade to PeopleSoft 8, a pure
Internet solution that offers real-time access to academic and administrative
information through any Web browser.
Along this road to IT transformation, we learned important lessons about project
management and implementation success. Today, we are reaping the benefits of
Student Administration, delivering improved service to our students, faculty
and staff.
Decisions that touch
virtually every member of a university community should not be made in a vacuum—or
within an IT department alone.
We credit our successful ISIS implementation to our development of a partnership
approach to project management. As we implemented, we recognized that our new
technology would overhaul campus processes that had been in place at Madison
for years. It became clear that threatening people’s comfort zones on
such a scale would be a significant exercise in change management, so we worked
to involve the end user in the process.
Our initial attempts met expectations with only qualified success. While the
technical implementation was successful, the impression it made on campus was
not entirely glowing. Therefore, we put in place a revised and much more robust
process to get additional input from a wider range of “voices” on
campus. Decisions that touch virtually every member of a university community
should not be made in a vacuum—or within an IT department alone.
Having built upon this partnership concept, we are pleased to share a well-tested
and fine-tuned best practice that we consider our “formula for implementation
success.”
1. Listen to End Users
Understand what pains end users, and offer them a meaningful role in the implementation
process. We assembled a core upgrade team to manage the implementation of PeopleSoft
8. But our organizational chart did not stop with that one entity. Our core
committee created additional teams, each assigned to study a specific module
of the new PeopleSoft software.
For example, we assembled a “Student Records Team,” a “Financial
Aid Team” and an “Admissions Team,” among others. As we built
each team, we ensured that membership included representatives from both the
IT side, but more importantly, from the functional, end-user side. The Student
Records Team, for instance, was managed by an assistant registrar as opposed
to an IT administrator.
Taking this concept even further, we employed a Campus Implementation Committee
that contained at least one representative from every school division on campus.
By flagging areas that needed improvement, this group helped us prioritize the
campus operations that required immediate IT attention. The committee would
review proposed changes to campus procedures, test them, and offer valuable
feedback on the new applications. Who better to analyze the impact of a new
student administrative process than those individuals who would use the technology
every day? End users’ opinions were perhaps the most valuable asset during
our upgrade, and their continuous involvement helped ensure a smooth adoption
of the end product.
2. Communicate, Communicate
Because we had learned that the new Student Administration technology disrupted
the “old way” of doing business at our university, constant, effective
communication with our ultimate end users was essential. Students, faculty,
and staff members needed to know which IT changes were taking place and when.
We placed so much stock in this concept that we hired a full-time communications
coordinator devoted specifically to the ISIS project.
Our communications coordinator built internal and external support for the new
technology through a variety of methods. For example, during the initial implementation,
he created a monthly newsletter that detailed project milestones such as go-lives,
upgrades, and maintenance periods. We have now expanded these efforts. Today,
he also distributes information about training opportunities, conducts surveys
and campus forums, and manages an informational ISIS Web site. By maintaining
a constant flow of information about the project, our communications coordinator
helps ensure that no end user is overwhelmed by the new technology. It has made
a world of difference.
3. Make Training Valuable
As we executed our implementation, we devoted key resources to training programs.
Two full-time staff members designed and facilitated regular training sessions
on the new technology, offering collateral material and hands-on experience
to end users campuswide.
“Making training valuable” is an important lesson learned. Even
today, with every go-live or upgrade on our campus, more training becomes necessary.
Our training staff must constantly find ways to keep curricula fresh for trainees.
At Wisconsin, we also discovered a new way to extend our limited training resources:
auxiliary training “coaches.” Because we lacked ample training personnel
to reach every end user, we initially identified 45 experts within each college
who were familiar with campus business processes. Then, we gave them early and
extra training in the new PeopleSoft technology.
This experience was so valuable that now, four years after the initial implementation,
we still maintain a group of 35 complete volunteers; and today’s ISIS
trainers are committed to keeping those experts trained and up to speed on every
technology change affecting their campus community. We call these informed individuals
“coaches” and have come to depend on them to help us cast a wider
training net. The coaches act as pseudo teaching assistants during training
sessions and ensure we are extra responsive to end-user questions. Additionally,
they help new staff members negotiate the initial access process.
4. Remember: Measure Success
After an exhausting IT upgrade, measurement is usually the last thing on an
organization’s mind. However, evaluation of one’s system could not
be more important. At Wisconsin, we have invested heavily in our PeopleSoft
project. We had buy-in from the highest levels, and we wanted to demonstrate
the beneficial return on the university’s investment. Prior to and throughout
the implementation, we conducted surveys and focus groups to learn what end
users desired in the new system. Post-implementation, and now again post-upgrade,
we have conducted additional surveys of our entire end-user community. As a
result, we have been able to distill valuable reports on the success of the
ISIS project and on subsequent upgrade efforts.
In hindsight, we would have taken our measurement efforts even further. A benchmark
survey of our old legacy student administration system would have been invaluable,
demonstrating “before and after” improvements to campus operations.
Due to the modernization of our systems, our campus is enjoying a new and improved
collaborative campus. Processes such as financial aid processing have never
been easier. No longer do we face lines of students picking up financial aid
checks—it is all done electronically. Admissions management is equally
efficient. Students can now apply to any of the University of Wisconsin schools
with one online application. As a result, processing time for undergraduate
admissions has drastically reduced even though the volume of applications has
actually increased.
Unifying our student administration systems was not just an exercise in effective
project management—it was also a case of designing a process that would
facilitate effective group decision making. While initially in need of fine-tuning,
the project now runs smoothly because all levels of the university were involved
in the process. Every member of our core and auxiliary committees was able to
offer a unique perspective about their technology needs, preferences, and processes.
And these contributions greatly enriched a dialogue that fostered a smooth and
successful implementation.
